THE GOOD:Loved the first three picks. I understand the argument about not taking a player that high in a position that is becoming less and less relevant, BUT. Barring the opportunity to jump in a suped-up Delorean with a flux capacitor and see the future, T Rich has, IMO, the least amount of bust potential and gives this franchise some identity. We needed it, we got it. Now maybe Rich can get the picture of Dawson off the top of the banner.

Be honest, you can't wait to watch Weeden sling the ball around the yard. Colt elicited NONE excitement, Weeden does. I may be prejudiced to liking this pick because he's old like most of the rest of us, but I honestly think he will be a huge upgrade at the position. One of Colt's biggest problems was his lack of size...how many times did balls get batted down at the line? At 6' 4" it may still happen to our new guy, but I'm doubting it happens with the same regularity. Throwing downfield in the wind should no longer be a problem.

May the Schwartz be with you. We needed a RT badly, and we got one. He may not have been the name some people wanted, but if they think he can play....fantastic. That 3rd pick HAD TO be either a tackle or a WR and it was. This pick nullified to me the "they reached for Weeden" argument because you got what you needed anyway.

The brain trust had a pretty solid day on Day 3. I barely watched most of these guys, but from what I am reading it seems like they found sound quality and continued to address needs and depth...even if many turn out to be ST fodder, our ST sucked last year so they should help. Can't expect much more from rounds 4 and on.

THE BAD:They had two obvious glaring needs before the draft began. One was addressed (Right Tackle), one really wasn't. I'm glad they nabbed the burner from Miami, but they needed so much more to upgrade what may have been their worst position on the field. Obviously if they addressed it with other picks the whole draft looks different, but it still was a complete whiff from a needs standpoint.....or at the very least a foul tip into the glove.

They really might be smarter than the rest of us, but the Hughes pick "on paper" is still a head scratcher. How many potential stars did we pass on to nab a dude who could have been picked about 150 slots later....even the kid himself thought he'd go in the 4th at the highest. Yikes.

THE UGLY:Not since Valentine and Winthorpe pulled one over on the Dukes have I seen a bigger hoodwink job that I saw with the Vikings suckering the Browns to trade up one spot. It's becoming fairly evident through what I've read/heard nationally that nobody was seriously in discussion with the Purple People Eaters to come up and grab T Rich, complete BS and subterfuge....we were the Huckleberrys. It doesn't gaul me so much in what we gave up to apparantly and unnecessarily move up one spot more than it made our brain trust look like complete buffoons nationally...I've seen enough national scorn to last a lifetime.

I read in one post-draft pick-by-pick analysis that the Browns pick of the speedster from Miami in the 4th was called another reach for the Browns and rated a D. Only one of two such Ds in the round.

And when you are in the state of the Browns, your picks in the first 3 rounds need to start or be in your rotation. Hughes, by ALL accounts (not some accounts), shouldn't make the team. He WILL make the team because the organization needs to save face. You can't make that bad of a mistake in the 1st 3 rounds (throw in the trade-down). Make your mistakes in the late rounds, not the first three. A lot of us in here are raving about our late-round picks. Hey, that's great. But you drastically improve your team in the first 4 rounds.

EDIT: And as I have posted elsewhere, most draft "experts" say the other three teams in our division's drafts graded better than the Browns.

"The nose of the bulldog has been slanted backwards so that he can breathe without letting go." -- Winston Churchill

Reach or not nationally, Benjamin provides speed where we needed it the most. If they get this cat on the field and succesfully lob a few deep balls at him, it will change what defenses want to do to stop us.

Hoodwinked by the Vikings. And for a team like the Browns with no depth, giving up three picks is no chump change. Richardson is a safe pick that fills a big hole, albeit at a devalued position.

Weeden pick was 100% a Holmgren "Oh shit, we gotta win now or me and my boy Shur are gone, lets pray this guy can play at the next level" pick. To me, he's an upgrade to McCoy, but maybe not in 2012. Pick was a reach. Pray I'm wrong. Weeden pick was 100% Holmgren.

Needed a RT, we'll see how Schwartz's career shapes up against the others that were available there.

Hughes was a massive reach given some of the other need guys on the board at the time. Coulda got him later. However, they got the kid DT from Boise that was supposed to go a lot earlier real late.

Browns have taken so many 4th/5th rd ILBs over the years. Every one has blown donkey balls. Hopefully one of Acho/Johnson can contribute.

One receiver and he's 5'10 with tiny hands and a tiny wing span. One cornerback taken, and it was in the 7th rd. Unacceptable. Totally unacceptable in a league where passing the ball and stopping the pass are paramount, and the Browns struggle to do both. And not one pass rusher. Who's gonna get to the QB on this team off the edge? Frostee Rucker? Juqua Parker?

Browns got better, obviously. TRich has a chance to be a dynamic player that can potentially change the identity of the offense. But to me, to come away from this draft with no one that can catch the ball, defend receivers, or rush the passer ... is just an epic fail. Browns have dog shit receivers and have set up Weeden to fail. Need 4 CBs in this league today too. Sheldon Brown is a FS. Have Haden, Patterson ... and blah. Would have been a different story if they had addressed WR and CB in free agency ... but just nothing? With Holmgren talking about how much Massa-stiff, Cribbs the kick returner, and Norwood are gonna improve, and how Greg Little's not gonna drop as many passes. Amazing.

"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

I don't think the Vikings hoodwinked the us at all. Sure all the reports say no one else had interest in trading up but that was an hour before the draft. The closer to the Vikings pick we got the lower their asking price would have gotten. It might have gotten to the point where they traded with Tampa for a 3rd rounder. I have no problem with the trade. The biggest question mark in this draft is the 3rd round tackle. Why take him so early?

OldDawg wrote:You can make a case that every significant pick was a reach:

TR: Could have gotten him at 4 without losing picks?....And even if we lose TR, Blackmon was a huge need.

Weeden: Could have gotten him at 37, and addressed WR or OL at 22

Schwartz: Higher rated tackles available at the time

Hughes: Never mind

I like 3 of these 4 players, but all may have been drafted too high.

And how do you not seriously address possibly your biggest need, WR, in a draft that was thought to be deep there.

Time will tell

That's exactly it. Even if the rest of your picks over perform their expected levels, you didn't address the most glaring need on the team in a draft that was extremely rich. Either Heckert truly knows something we dont, or he just faceplanted, and well have to deal with another bullshit turnover/rebuild next year.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

I'm still trying to figure out who was going to trade ahead of Cleveland at 37 to take Weeden, and I'm coming up with nothing. Taking Weeden at 22 was a message to McCoy and the fans From that arrogant ass Holmgren that Weeden is the starter, nothing more.

When you're using first-round picks to send messages, it means you're not focusing on improving the team to win a Super Bowl. Nothing against Weeden, I'm hoping he's a star here for the next 5-10 years, but we would've been better off taking DeCastro at 22 and getting Weeden in the second round. My opinion, I could be wrong.

Love all the Wide Receivers we took high in the draft . . . wait, nevermind.

Start scouting WRs this year, the Browns will be targeting one in the first round next year after Weeden has 500 passes dropped this year. Although I'm sure Holmgren will find some way to blame that on Colt McCoy's father.

Hoodwinked by the Vikings. And for a team like the Browns with no depth, giving up three picks is no chump change.

I find it incredibly naive to think that no team would've jumped the Browns and taken TR at 3. I went to Wright's Place depressed because I was SURE it was gonna happen.

If all it took for the Browns to move up one spot was a 4, 5, and 7, then Tampa easily could've gone from 5 to 3 for about similar compensation if the Browns hadn't been willing to make the move. The Vikes just wanted some extra filler as long as they could still get Kalil - which they could've at 5.

Giving up 3 late round picks to make SURE you get your guy... best move of the draft.

Are you gonna sit there and tell me YOU have watched the available RT prospects extensively and YOU feel it was a reach? Or are you just basing your opinion off of what others say?

Obviously, THE BROWNS HAD HIM RATED THE HIGHEST AVAILABLE. Those other guys were there, and THEY LIKED SCHWARTZ BETTER.

Is your freakin' theory that ANY pick is a reach if he's not the best available on Mike Mayock's big board?

Here's when a pick is a reach: If you could assuredly get him later.

Taking Richardson at #3 definitely isn't a reach since any number of teams would've gladly taken him there. You can argue about the move up, but I LOVE the trade up so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Weeden was a bit of a reach at 22 - there's a good chance he might've been there at 37.

Schwartz wasn't a reach at all since he wouldn't have made it to the 3rd and they obviously liked him more than the other guys that other people had rated higher.

Hughes was an off-the-charts reach.

The rest? Late round picks. Hard to call anything a reach in those rounds with a straight face since player ratings at that point are so arbitrary from GM to GM. I guess if they drafted me in the 5th, that would be a reach.

I'm still trying to figure out who was going to trade ahead of Cleveland at 37 to take Weeden, and I'm coming up with nothing. Taking Weeden at 22 was a message to McCoy and the fans From that arrogant ass Holmgren that Weeden is the starter, nothing more.

When you're using first-round picks to send messages, it means you're not focusing on improving the team to win a Super Bowl. Nothing against Weeden, I'm hoping he's a star here for the next 5-10 years, but we would've been better off taking DeCastro at 22 and getting Weeden in the second round. My opinion, I could be wrong.

Love all the Wide Receivers we took high in the draft . . . wait, nevermind.

Start scouting WRs this year, the Browns will be targeting one in the first round next year after Weeden has 500 passes dropped this year. Although I'm sure Holmgren will find some way to blame that on Colt McCoy's father.

Dude, you need to take a walk around the block, grab a beer, and relax, because you've obviously fried some wiring at some point. You cannot possibly believe this.

Reread what you just wrote. You wrote that the Browns could have had Weeden at 37 and knew they could have had him there for sure. But, instead they chose to take him at 22 because it sends a message to Colt McCoy.

Again, you are saying they picked Weeden so that McCoy gets the message. I'm not sure what message they felt they needed to send, but that was the purpose of the pick.

I think the entire city of Cleveland needs to take a vacation to Jamaica or something.

The Browns were NEVER for one instant considering taking a Guard (DiCastro) at that 22 pick. If Weeden were beamed up by aliens the day before the draft, the Browns STILL weren't going to take DiCastro.

I'm still trying to figure out who was going to trade ahead of Cleveland at 37 to take Weeden, and I'm coming up with nothing. Taking Weeden at 22 was a message to McCoy and the fans From that arrogant ass Holmgren that Weeden is the starter, nothing more.

When you're using first-round picks to send messages, it means you're not focusing on improving the team to win a Super Bowl. Nothing against Weeden, I'm hoping he's a star here for the next 5-10 years, but we would've been better off taking DeCastro at 22 and getting Weeden in the second round. My opinion, I could be wrong.

Love all the Wide Receivers we took high in the draft . . . wait, nevermind.

Start scouting WRs this year, the Browns will be targeting one in the first round next year after Weeden has 500 passes dropped this year. Although I'm sure Holmgren will find some way to blame that on Colt McCoy's father.

Dude, you need to take a walk around the block, grab a beer, and relax, because you've obviously fried some wiring at some point. You cannot possibly believe this.

Reread what you just wrote. You wrote that the Browns could have had Weeden at 37 and knew they could have had him there for sure. But, instead they chose to take him at 22 because it sends a message to Colt McCoy.

Again, you are saying they picked Weeden so that McCoy gets the message. I'm not sure what message they felt they needed to send, but that was the purpose of the pick.

I think the entire city of Cleveland needs to take a vacation to Jamaica or something.

I think it came out wrong because I'm not upset in the way you think I am. I'm more upset about losing out on a guy like DeCastro than I am taking Weeden higher than I think we needed to.

Not a fan of Holmgren because I think his ego will not bring this team a Super Bowl, but I've resigned myself to the reality nothing probably will change until we have new ownership. Some of that frustration probably is bleeding out.

The only thing I'm really upset about is the fact WR just didn't get addressed properly.

. . . and I did drink several beers last night. I was going to drink scotch, but funds are kind of low right now and I wasn't raised to drink cheap scotch.

I don't know if it was a good plan or not. Time will tell. They clearly had different ratings for a few guys than other teams did. Don't know enough to know what, if anything, that means. I don't know for value. Maybe we reached too much and could have traded down to get a few more picks, picking up more guys. I don't know. That doubt is why I have the grade as only a B+.

But I love the players selected. We addressed needed positions with guys that were solid started starters in college rather than good combine day guys. Our offense should look like an NFL offense for the first time since 2007. And we have the QB in the draft with the best potential to be franchise outside of the top two. What isn't to like?

justmebd wrote:I think it came out wrong because I'm not upset in the way you think I am. I'm more upset about losing out on a guy like DeCastro than I am taking Weeden higher than I think we needed to.

Not a fan of Holmgren because I think his ego will not bring this team a Super Bowl, but I've resigned myself to the reality nothing probably will change until we have new ownership. Some of that frustration probably is bleeding out.

The only thing I'm really upset about is the fact WR just didn't get addressed properly.

. . . and I did drink several beers last night. I was going to drink scotch, but funds are kind of low right now and I wasn't raised to drink cheap scotch.

I get that. I don't know where the whole "Holmgren's ego" thing came from, but you're sure not the only one to feel that way.

I switched from beer to bourbon last night at whatever o'clock and ended up talking nonsense on twitter with CDT until 3 in the morning.

There seems to be a lot of consternation about the lack of attention payed to the WR corp in the draft. I get that, but I think it's a bit overblown.

The Browns had 4 gaping holes to fill and 3 picks to fill them. They needed a WR, QB, RT, and RB. I do think that RB is the least important of those to fill, but in this draft, with what was available at #4, it's hard to argue with the conclusion that TR is the right pick in that spot.

As far as QB, it was addressed with the best QB option that was realistically available to them.

That leaves 1 pick to address both RT and WR. If they had gone with Hill instead of Schwartz there would no doubt be a lot of teeth gnashing about the swinging door on the right side of the line that hasn't been addressed in 3 years.

So, 4 holes...3 picks. What else can be done?

Unless they trade down from #4, but where o they go to add another 2nd rounder? If they trade with Dallas maybe they end up with something along the lines of Reiff, Weeden, Martin, and Hill. That's not bad, but none of those are the supposed transcendent talent that TR is.

Truth be told, I think that if you have one spot to fill a hole between RT and WR, I fill the RT spot.

A better line, better QB, and better running game does have the potential to make the previously intolerable receiving corp tolerable.

There's nothing that can make the the Cousins/Pashos/moundofrefriedbeans right side tolerable if that position isn't addressed early in the draft.

I have no qualms with the selection of Schwartz over Massie/Martin/Glenn etc, even though it seems likely they could have filled the RT hole later than they did. Who am I to comment on their evaluations of OL prospects?

Inasmuch as I wanted a Stephen Hill, it also doesn't bother me that they went RT instead of WR at 37. A giant hole was filled.

What bothers me is, WRs generally seem to take the longest to develop in the NFL of any position, outside of the top couple WRs in each draft. Taking a legit WR in this draft would first start to really pay dividends in 2013 and onward. By not addressing that gaping hole in the roster, it sets that clock back an additional year. (Please hold off on the "Sincerely, Randy Moss and AJ Green" comments.)

I would not have felt the same had they not addressed RT until the 4th. Even if it is a correct assumption that Schwartz > Massie/Martin/Glenn, any of those players would certainly have been an upgrade over the current RT, and we would not need to get a RT next year. We do still need to get a WR next year.

Little and Cribbs/Mo start. Norwood and Benjamin see a lot of time on the field too.

Part of me wants to move one of Evan Moore or Jordan Cameron to WR and be done with it. You have Little, your do-it-all guy, Moore, your possession guy, Norwood, your slot guy, and Benjamin, your deep-threat/end-around-threat. Cribbs and MoMass fit in there somewhere.

Put another way: entering the 2013 draft, would you prefer Schwartz (the assumed best of the remaining RT bunch) + Travis Benjamin, or one of the lesser aforementioned RTs + Stephen Hill? The former pair leaves you with a RT but a hole at WR to fill in that draft; the latter hopefully lets you concentrate on other positions of need.

Hikohadon wrote:Little and Cribbs/Mo start. Norwood and Benjamin see a lot of time on the field too.

Given Heckgrin's pursuit of Floyd and Wright, I'm thinking the future plan is TheGuy and Little start with Norwood, Benjamin, and MoMass fighting it out for slot and fourth. Which is why they didn't grab anyone between Wright and Benjamin, if they're going for a starting WR they want him to be The Guy and not another #2 or #3.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:Put another way: entering the 2013 draft, would you prefer Schwartz (the assumed best of the remaining RT bunch) + Travis Benjamin, or one of the lesser aforementioned RTs + Stephen Hill? The former pair leaves you with a RT but a hole at WR to fill in that draft; the latter hopefully lets you concentrate on other positions of need.

Maybe, but it's not like people are exactly writing odes to the current 3rd and 4th round selections starting at guard. I'm not sure why you are assuming that if the Browns went Hill and took a RT in the 3/4th that the problem is solved.

Also, you can draft like the Stillers and Rats when you don't fuck up drafting key guys like Rottenberger, Mendenhall, Wallace, Flacco, and Rice. Weeden's the fifth pick in eight years we've spent in the first three rounds on a QB, we've dropped at least eleven in total on offensive skill position players. We absolutely need Weeden, TRich, Little, and next year's guy to be all that.

"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT

Hikohadon wrote:The Browns were NEVER for one instant considering taking a Guard (DiCastro) at that 22 pick. If Weeden were beamed up by aliens the day before the draft, the Browns STILL weren't going to take DiCastro.

You were getting ready to watch E.T. when you made that post weren't you?

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

They didn't just address 3 major needs, they attacked those needs. Sure every single player could under achieve but that isn't necessarily what makes a draft grade. For once, in what feels like a very long time, they seemed to set up a straight forward plan AND they executed it. We just have to hope Heckert and his scouts are correct about these particular players, so far Heckert and his crew have a respectable track record so there is a little reason for optimism.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

Hikohadon wrote:Little and Cribbs/Mo start. Norwood and Benjamin see a lot of time on the field too.

Given Heckgrin's pursuit of Floyd and Wright, I'm thinking the future plan is TheGuy and Little start with Norwood, Benjamin, and MoMass fighting it out for slot and fourth. Which is why they didn't grab anyone between Wright and Benjamin, if they're going for a starting WR they want him to be The Guy and not another #2 or #3.

Actually, this is an angle I haven't really thought about, and I like it. We've made a few things clear:

#1: The QB we have in place was a limp noodle dickface, and was making our average receivers look worse. #2: Our average receivers weren't helping themselves, as Slo-Mass was hurt all year and Little was learning on the fly.#3: Blackmon was more of a very good receiver than an ELITE (read: Megatron, Fitz, Randy Moss, etc) receiver. Floyd has shown flashes, but has massive motor/character concerns. Hill (the only other guy I think has the measurables to be a #1 receiver potential) doesn't have enough data to judge and could be a massive bust.#4: You can get elite WR in the top 15 of other drafts.#5: TR was an ELITE talent you can't get in the top 15 of other drafts.#6: Weeden is currently and immediately able to elevate the current group of receivers to tolerable, and be franchise level capable with an elite receiver, good o-line, and elite running back. (Serviceable to good defense)

So, going forward, Weeden and a gelled line will make the team look much better against far better competition. You can easily see that the team did that last year, playing to the level of competition essentially all season. (Excepting the Tennessee and Houston games) You continue to do that, win 5-7 games and show significant improvement, and grab the WR/defense next year that will put you into legitimate contention, with a full year of experience for your QB.

I'm not saying I would approach the draft/season in this fashion, (I would have waited on Weeden until 37 and passed on Hughes) but I don't have Heckert's draft record. He won a lot of games with some truly garbage receivers in Philly before making the splash with T.O. and then "reaching" for Desean Jackson. (and adding Maclin on Chicks) Both he and Holmgren likely think that in the WCO system they can get value from middling talent. Lots of other picks I've disagreed with vehemently at the time (Haden, Sheard) have performed well, and we're not ready for gametime yet.

In short: maybe there is something to the thought (mentioned a few times) that beyond Blackmon, Floyd, and Wright, the talent wasn't going to be anything they dont already have on the roster. The only thing they truly didnt have was a burner (unless you count Mitchell who apparently has leprosy) and they took a flier on that in the 4th. (Possibly my favorite pick of the day outside of Weedon, if it pans out)

I'll give the draft a C+/B-.....if Weedon is better than Dalton or Benjamin turns into a legit deep threat, i'll move it to a B. Can't help but feel like they took a Cleveland Indians NRI throw-shit-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks approach to the O-line/D-line depth, but that's not such a bad thing.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

FUDU wrote:In terms of reviewing the draft just hours after it ends I'm with JB.

They didn't just address 3 major needs, they attacked those needs. Sure every single player could under achieve but that isn't necessarily what makes a draft grade. For once, in what feels like a very long time, they seemed to set up a straight forward plan AND they executed it. We just have to hope Heckert and his scouts are correct about these particular players, so far Heckert and his crew have a respectable track record so there is a little reason for optimism.

FUDU wrote:In terms of reviewing the draft just hours after it ends I'm with JB.

They didn't just address 3 major needs, they attacked those needs. Sure every single player could under achieve but that isn't necessarily what makes a draft grade. For once, in what feels like a very long time, they seemed to set up a straight forward plan AND they executed it. We just have to hope Heckert and his scouts are correct about these particular players, so far Heckert and his crew have a respectable track record so there is a little reason for optimism.

Yeah..... they attacked them, like a goddamn puma cat.

Im not sure if this is an insult or sarcasm or what. Pumas are ferocious. Please be more clear.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

motherscratcher wrote:There seems to be a lot of consternation about the lack of attention payed to the WR corp in the draft. I get that, but I think it's a bit overblown.

The Browns had 4 gaping holes to fill and 3 picks to fill them. They needed a WR, QB, RT, and RB. I do think that RB is the least important of those to fill, but in this draft, with what was available at #4, it's hard to argue with the conclusion that TR is the right pick in that spot.

As far as QB, it was addressed with the best QB option that was realistically available to them.

That leaves 1 pick to address both RT and WR. If they had gone with Hill instead of Schwartz there would no doubt be a lot of teeth gnashing about the swinging door on the right side of the line that hasn't been addressed in 3 years.

So, 4 holes...3 picks. What else can be done?

Unless they trade down from #4, but where o they go to add another 2nd rounder? If they trade with Dallas maybe they end up with something along the lines of Reiff, Weeden, Martin, and Hill. That's not bad, but none of those are the supposed transcendent talent that TR is.

Truth be told, I think that if you have one spot to fill a hole between RT and WR, I fill the RT spot.

A better line, better QB, and better running game does have the potential to make the previously intolerable receiving corp tolerable.

There's nothing that can make the the Cousins/Pashos/moundofrefriedbeans right side tolerable if that position isn't addressed early in the draft.

I think they made the right call.

What else can be done?

How about not trade down in the 4th round. And then don't draft possibly the worst player selected in any round with that now-even-lower 4th round pick. At a position where there was no great need.

Instead, how about even possibly trading up with that 4th. I don't even care how far you trae up... just up. And then actually draft the best WR available with that now-higher pick.

That's clearly what else can be done.

And there are two kinds of NFL people right now that result from that transgression.

1) Cleveland fans that are once again bewildered about crap like this.2) The rest of the NFL people that are laughing their collective heads off at the Browns.

I mean, did Hughes's mom have some incriminating pictures of Holmgren or something? That's what inquiring minds want to know.

"The nose of the bulldog has been slanted backwards so that he can breathe without letting go." -- Winston Churchill

CAVSTRIBEBROWNSin07! wrote:Put another way: entering the 2013 draft, would you prefer Schwartz (the assumed best of the remaining RT bunch) + Travis Benjamin, or one of the lesser aforementioned RTs + Stephen Hill? The former pair leaves you with a RT but a hole at WR to fill in that draft; the latter hopefully lets you concentrate on other positions of need.

Maybe, but it's not like people are exactly writing odes to the current 3rd and 4th round selections starting at guard. I'm not sure why you are assuming that if the Browns went Hill and took a RT in the 3/4th that the problem is solved.

I have absolutely no idea if it would be solved. But you think that if they took one of the 3/4 RT guys that they'd be looking at RT as early in next draft as they were in this one? That was my point.

How about not trade down in the 4th round. And then don't draft possibly the worst player selected in any round with that now-even-lower 4th round pick. At a position where there was no great need.

Instead, how about even possibly trading up with that 4th. I don't even care how far you trae up... just up. And then actually draft the best WR available with that now-higher pick.

That's clearly what else can be done.

And there are two kinds of NFL people right now that result from that transgression.

1) Cleveland fans that are once again bewildered about crap like this.2) The rest of the NFL people that are laughing their collective heads off at the Browns.

I mean, did Hughes's mom have some incriminating pictures of Holmgren or something? That's what inquiring minds want to know.

*I assume you meant the 3rd, not the 4th.

Yeah, that's great. The old, "we should have traded up and got our receiver!" argument. Of course you neglect to tell us how far to trade up, who we would pick, and how it's a clear upgrade over what we already have.

So I did a little digging.

In 2010 and 2011 I took a quick look at the receivers selected in mid 2nd through the 3rd rounds to see what kind of guy we could expect to get there. Most of them had receptions in the 50-60 range with total yards in the 600-700 range.

These guys were the top performers. Most picks have performed well below those numbers.

Mohammed Massequoi over the last 2 seasons had 27 starts and 67/867

This is not an example of me singing the praises of MoMass. He clearly needs to be upgraded. This is me trying to explain that the number one receiver that we want to match up with Greg Little is probably not coming in the mid 2nd-3rd rounds.

Sure, maybe we could have traded up (we have no way of knowing if they thought about it, if they tried, or what the cost would be) and snatched Alshon Jeffery, Ryan Broyles, or Rueben Randle...the receivers that were selected in the second round.

We could have stayed at 67 and picked DeVier Posey, TJ Graham, or Mohamed Sanu.

We could have traded back and still picked Ty Hilton.

But you know what those guys most likely are?...Most likely those guys are Mohammed Massequoi.

I'm not excusing the Hughes pick. It was a confusing mind fuck of a stupid pick. I'd much rather have any of those receivers I just mentioned on the roster. What I'm not going to do is pretend we just passed over Larry Fitzgerald.

What I'm railing against here is the idea that the draft is completely fucked because we didn't address the WR situation by trading up to the mid 2nd or 3rd round.

Because the answer to all of our prays and solution to all of our problems was probably not sitting there to be taken. A #2/#3 receiver is a nice valuable asset. But we have those. What we need is a #1 receiver.

I think the general disappointment is due to the fact that everyone assumed they would get a #1 receiver. Mary Kay mocked Blackmon right up to the draft. If they didn't take Blackmon, surely they would take a WR at #22 at the latest, we all believed.

Then the unbelievable happened. They passed on a WR with their first three picks, and in round 3 drafted a backup DT. Nobody even claims Hughes has a chance in hell of beating out Taylor or Rubin for a starting job. How could they pass on a WR to take a backup DT? Not quite as bad as drafting a longsnapper, but not far off.

What made it worse was that the pundits had this guy as a late round pick or UFA.

The brain trust explained their thinking; Taylor and Rubin had to play too many snaps last year. Another tackle was a bigger need than fans realized. And there's nothing wrong with the receivers that a better QB won't cure.

So now there's a lot of angst. We went into the draft with certain expectations, and the team went in a different direction. In fact, none of the guys from the 3rd round on look like potential starters. They're all backups and role players. Browns fans were looking for more than three starters and some depth, more than a 172 pound receiver in round 4.

I was ecstatic after the Browns managed to get BOTH Joe Thomas and Brady Quinn, both of whom were considered by guys like Mayock and Kiper to be top 10 picks. I thought that was the best Browns draft since Newsome/Matthews. Franchise QB and franchise left tackle. Wrong.

I like this year's draft. But then again, I like them all, except for that one where they didn't have any choices until the 4th round and they picked Beau Bell.

How about not trade down in the 4th round. And then don't draft possibly the worst player selected in any round with that now-even-lower 4th round pick. At a position where there was no great need.

Instead, how about even possibly trading up with that 4th. I don't even care how far you trae up... just up. And then actually draft the best WR available with that now-higher pick.

That's clearly what else can be done.

And there are two kinds of NFL people right now that result from that transgression.

1) Cleveland fans that are once again bewildered about crap like this.2) The rest of the NFL people that are laughing their collective heads off at the Browns.

I mean, did Hughes's mom have some incriminating pictures of Holmgren or something? That's what inquiring minds want to know.

*I assume you meant the 3rd, not the 4th.

Yeah, that's great. The old, "we should have traded up and got our receiver!" argument. Of course you neglect to tell us how far to trade up, who we would pick, and how it's a clear upgrade over what we already have.

So I did a little digging.

In 2010 and 2011 I took a quick look at the receivers selected in mid 2nd through the 3rd rounds to see what kind of guy we could expect to get there. Most of them had receptions in the 50-60 range with total yards in the 600-700 range.

These guys were the top performers. Most picks have performed well below those numbers.

Mohammed Massequoi over the last 2 seasons had 27 starts and 67/867

This is not an example of me singing the praises of MoMass. He clearly needs to be upgraded. This is me trying to explain that the number one receiver that we want to match up with Greg Little is probably not coming in the mid 2nd-3rd rounds.

Sure, maybe we could have traded up (we have no way of knowing if they thought about it, if they tried, or what the cost would be) and snatched Alshon Jeffery, Ryan Broyles, or Rueben Randle...the receivers that were selected in the second round.

We could have stayed at 67 and picked DeVier Posey, TJ Graham, or Mohamed Sanu.

We could have traded back and still picked Ty Hilton.

But you know what those guys most likely are?...Most likely those guys are Mohammed Massequoi.

I'm not excusing the Hughes pick. It was a confusing mind fuck of a stupid pick. I'd much rather have any of those receivers I just mentioned on the roster. What I'm not going to do is pretend we just passed over Larry Fitzgerald.

What I'm railing against here is the idea that the draft is completely fucked because we didn't address the WR situation by trading up to the mid 2nd or 3rd round.

Because the answer to all of our prays and solution to all of our problems was probably not sitting there to be taken. A #2/#3 receiver is a nice valuable asset. But we have those. What we need is a #1 receiver.

So, I ask you...which of those guys is the man?

Damn, MS, you win. I am not willing to do that kind of digging. I mean, is there any reasonable reason why we take Hughes as opposed to the best WR on your board. We agree. The Hughes pick still sucks. And if you want to make me feel better about drafting a DT, how about he be rated in the top 25 of all DTs in the draft.

"The nose of the bulldog has been slanted backwards so that he can breathe without letting go." -- Winston Churchill

OldDawg wrote:Damn, MS, you win. I am not willing to do that kind of digging. I mean, is there any reasonable reason why we take Hughes as opposed to the best WR on your board. We agree. The Hughes pick still sucks. And if you want to make me feel better about drafting a DT, how about he be rated in the top 25 of all DTs in the draft.

Meh, it wasn't a lot of digging, and while I stand by my statement that e0y can and should go fuck himself, he's right. It was draft analysis on the Pros level.

MoMass sucks. No matter what the numbers look like, I've seen the guy play. My point is that if the Browns wanted to seriously adress the WR position, they needed to take Blackmon, Floyd, Wright, or Hill in the 1st/2nd round. But in doing that another hole would not have gotten filled, or filled later with a worse player.

Like I said, I don't get Hughes. I'd rather have stayed and picked Posey or Sanu at 67. But I have trouble saying that's "filling the hole at WR" because there's a pretty decent chance that those guys end up being the same guy as MoMass turned out to be.